[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3ea8ac20-6332-0c0c-645b-36ca4231c109@manjaro.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2025 10:47:06 +0100
From: "Dragan Simic" <dsimic@...jaro.org>
To: "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <mani@...nel.org>
Cc: "Geraldo Nascimento" <geraldogabriel@...il.com>, "Shawn Lin" <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>, "Lorenzo Pieralisi" <lpieralisi@...nel.org>, Krzysztof WilczyĆski <kwilczynski@...nel.org>, "Rob Herring" <robh@...nel.org>, "Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, "Heiko Stuebner" <heiko@...ech.de>, "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, "Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@...nel.org>, "Johan Jonker" <jbx6244@...il.com>, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] PCI: rockchip:
limit RK3399 to 2.5 GT/s to prevent damage
Heello Manivannan and Geraldo,
On Thursday, December 18, 2025 09:05 CET, Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 06:47:05PM -0300, Geraldo Nascimento wrote:
> > Shawn Lin from Rockchip has reiterated that there may be danger in using
> > their PCIe with 5.0 GT/s speeds. Warn the user if they make a DT change
> > from the default and drive at 2.5 GT/s only, even if the DT
> > max-link-speed property is invalid or inexistent.
> >
> > This change is corroborated by RK3399 official datasheet [1], which
> > says maximum link speed for this platform is 2.5 GT/s.
> >
> > [1] https://opensource.rock-chips.com/images/d/d7/Rockchip_RK3399_Datasheet_V2.1-20200323.pdf
> >
> > Fixes: 956cd99b35a8 ("PCI: rockchip: Separate common code from RC driver")
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ffd05070-9879-4468-94e3-b88968b4c21b@rock-chips.com/
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> > Reported-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org>
> > Reported-by: Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Geraldo Nascimento <geraldogabriel@...il.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c | 10 ++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c
> > index 0f88da378805..992ccf4b139e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c
> > @@ -66,8 +66,14 @@ int rockchip_pcie_parse_dt(struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip)
> > }
> >
> > rockchip->link_gen = of_pci_get_max_link_speed(node);
> > - if (rockchip->link_gen < 0 || rockchip->link_gen > 2)
> > - rockchip->link_gen = 2;
> > + if (rockchip->link_gen < 0 || rockchip->link_gen > 2) {
> > + rockchip->link_gen = 1;
> > + dev_warn(dev, "invalid max-link-speed, set to 2.5 GT/s\n");
> > + }
> > + else if (rockchip->link_gen == 2) {
> > + rockchip->link_gen = 1;
> > + dev_warn(dev, "5.0 GT/s is dangerous, set to 2.5 GT/s\n");
>
> What does 'danger' really mean here? Link instability or something else?
> Error messages should be precise and not fearmongering.
I agree that the original wording is a bit suboptimal, and I'd suggest
to Geraldo that the produced warning message is changed to
"5.0 GT/s may cause data corruption, limited to to 2.5 GT/s\n"
or something similar, to better reflect the actual underlying issue.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists